Abstinence-only Sex Ed

Thank you, thank you .

And now back to our regularly scheduled fun .

 

Just to be clear in the heat of argument... someday if and when I have kids, I don't plan to implement oppressive sets of rules and try to make sure my kids don't have one second of privacy. I'm all about communication, trust, and respect. And loosening the reigns as it's earned. I plan to (if I don't chicken out) explain anything that needs to be known about sex, including protection.

I'm just saying that if that approach is met with an "I'll do what I want and you can't stop me" attitude, it's a breach of the parent-child relationship I tried to establish.

 

Sure, I agree about the last part there (and the first for that matter). However, I'd say that such breaches are the result of a need for attention, extreme inscecurity on a teen's part (or other personal troubles), or something else that's gone amiss. There's almost always something deeper if you look.

 

Oh, I agree. So what are we arguing about again? I guess it just comes down to, if parents and kids can stay on the same page and respect each other's roles, a whole lot of problems can be avoided.

 

I'm just saying that if that approach is met with an "I'll do what I want and you can't stop me" attitude, it's a breach of the parent-child relationship I tried to establish.

"Communication, trust and respect" are the closest to a guarantee against a kid responding that way. My father didn't communicate, didn't trust (and couldn't be trusted) and didn't respect (and didn't earn respect). He would forget I existed for months on end, then issue random punishments (usually for me daring to read a book on Buddhism or issue a political opinion he disagreed with), and by the time I was 12, I would just tell him off and ignore him, which suited him fine. But my mother communicated, respected and trusted, so she got those in return - I would do anything for her. She never even had to punish me because she could make me feel so guilty with a quick lecture on consequences to what I'd done wrong. I was never grounded, never spanked (by her), never had privileges taken away. Those things don't teach - they only reinforce sneakiness.

By the way, it turned out my father had a severe mental disorder which was undiagnosed for all those years. I mean, honestly, the worst parent of sound mind wouldn't attempt to punish a kid for having differing political thoughts. That's clearly off the deep end.

Anyway, that is why I believe bad kids almost always come from bad parents. Even one good parent or one good teacher can often give a kid self-respect - and it's a lack of self-respect that leads to most "bad" behavior. I had a great mother and an evil father, but I turned out good because I certainly didn't want to turn out like him.

 

I agree. For me, much of my problems when I was younger stemmed from the fact that I wanted attention. My dad didn't really talk to me unless it was a command. "Do the dishes." When I asked him questions he either told me to ask my mom or ignored me. So I did what I could to get his attention. And I was a rotten kid. I think that in the majority of cases, the parents do deserve at least some of the blame.

 

And, hey, I have sympathy for parents who try, but still fail. Sure, that happens.

I think, despite all the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that people are inherently good, or at least harmless. It's not in their nature to lash out unless they feel threatened - it's true of every pet I've ever seen, so it makes sense to apply it to humans. I think kids are born to have respect for themselves and others, and it gets drummed out of them by seeing over and over that doing right counts for nothing, or that no one around them ever does right, and they get by.

Most of the promiscuous kids I've known had promiscuous parents (and the parents just say, "That was my busines, not theirs"). Examples and communication mean all the difference.

A woman in her early 20's recently told me how her parents were religious - her father a minister - but all they told the kids about sex was "make your own decisions". She felt she was madly in love at 15, had never really even heard of waiting for marriage, or 18 or college or.... well, waiting for anything but that lovey feeling. So she started having sex then, and really wasn't sure which end was up in her love life anymore, about 8 years later.

So again, communication. Like parents who just say, "Wait until you're married, and shut up", parents who simply offer no thoughts are not being liberal - they're being neglecful.

 

Ouch. There's a lot of good parents out there having a hard time raising their kids who would probably take issue with that.

How do you classify parents, if not by the children they have produced -- that being the definition of parent? They may be good people, but I don't see how you can call someone that raises a problem child a good parent in a truly objective sense. Alot of good people are absolutely terrible parents.

 

They may be good people, but I don't see how you can call someone that raises a problem child a good parent in a truly objective sense. Alot of good people are absolutely terrible parents.

Many children who are "problem" children are that way because of no fault of the parent. My oldest has Aspberger's Syndrome. We do everything for him, medication, behavior counseling...everything. Other parents deal with ADHD, depression, etc and their problem children are that way and its only their fault if they refuse to get them treated.

I don't think its unresonable for a 16 and 17 year to be out until midnight. Under 16 a parent has to be more strict and I don't think a teenager under 16 is ready for dating alone. A parent has to take an active role in a child's life. Know who their friends are, where they are going to be and with who and call if they are going to be late. A parent has to give their teenager the responsiblity of being out on there own, if they break curfew and don't call then they can be grounded. You have to teach your children to be responsible for themselves, if they break the rules they get punished. If they are never allowed to be on their own in social situations they will never learn.

A parent's job is to prepare their children for living production, responsible and healthy lives. A child can not learn this in a vaccuum.

 

"Most of the promiscuous kids I've known had promiscuous parents (and the parents just say, "That was my busines, not theirs"). Examples and communication mean all the difference. "

Agreed, agreed, agreed. It must sound better when you say it, because I feel like when I say it, I get the "you're too uptight and parents have a life to live, too" speech. I say once you have children, you forfeit your freedom to live that type of life.

"How do you classify parents, if not by the children they have produced -- that being the definition of parent? "

Essentially, yes, but I think there's too many external factors that can interfere with parenting. Even good parents can get trumped by peer pressure, desensitivation of sex and violence by society, glorification of certain lifestyles by movies and TV, a natural desire for rebellion, etc. Most of the time good parents can manage all that, but not always.

 

Other parents deal with ADHD, depression, etc and their problem children are that way and its only their fault if they refuse to get them treated.

True, I was leaving that sort of situation out of the equation, as it muddies the whole issue of who, if anyone, is at fault (hard to blame a sick kid, either, unless you refuse to believe in mental illness, which I think the majority of people still do). Also, there is a split among doctors as to whether serial killers are made, born or both - some kids may well be born complete psychos, and there isn't much we seem to be able to do for sociopaths as yet.

A parent's job is to prepare their children for living production, responsible and healthy lives. A child can not learn this in a vaccuum.

Exactly. The easiest thing a parent can do is stuff the kid in a chastity belt and lock him/her in the basement, but someday the kid will get out and won't have any idea how to live.

Good points, JM Mom.

I feel like when I say it, I get the "you're too uptight and parents have a life to live, too" speech. I say once you have children, you forfeit your freedom to live that type of life.

I'm very much in favor of people being allowed to do anything they want that doesn't hurt anyone else. You don't need a study to show that when dad goes out looking for tail every night or mom brings home a new stud every night, that's not a healthy form of sexuality, and it's the example the kids are seeing most. I've seen some of this in my own family - one cousin whose mom had a revolving bedroom door got married at 16 just to get away from her. So far, ten years later, it's a good marriage, but that is a massive exception to the rule, I'm afraid. Most marriages like that bring more harm than good, and often unwanted children into the mix as well.

I've known divorced parents who dated discreetly and responsibly, and I don't see that it harmed their kids - it may have actually prepared them more for dating than seeing a happy marriage does. So it's not as if we're saying a divorce ends your love life. You just need to maintain a love life you wouldn't mind your kids mimicking. Unfortunately, sometimes I think that is what they ARE doing. Ah, well.

Even good parents can get trumped by peer pressure, desensitivation of sex and violence by society, glorification of certain lifestyles by movies and TV, a natural desire for rebellion, etc.

I can't speak about peer pressure - my peers were so terrified of me (don't ask me why) no one would have dared suggest I do anything, ever. As to the whole culture/media influence, I think communication is all it takes to knock that one right out. First, you have to know what your kids are watching/reading/listening to. The only way to do that is to be prepared not to go ballistic if they're listening to gangsta rap or watching the soft porn that somehow passes for "daytime TV". Instead of reacting with horror, ask them what's so great about it. Ask them what's not so great about other things they don't watch/listen/read. Get them thinking critically.

Well, that's my opinion. Sorry I made it sound like a PSA.

 

And this whole idea that marriage is mostly done for money or the fear of being alone is crap.

i disagree. those two, along with with caving into social pressure and immature people who think they are ready for a lifetime commitment but don't understand what that really means, are the reasons behind most of the marriages i've ever seen. the number of couples i've seen marry for reasons other than those i could probably count on both hands.

Well, I've already said this. I think they have that right until their kids are legal adults. Parents can stop their kids from doing other things and sex shouldn't be any different, even if it is a touchy subject. If you're going to allow underage kids to make all their own decisions about sex, you have to let them completely decide everything else for their own, too.

i think that, ultimately, parents do have to let kids do whatever they're going to do past a certain age. you can't stop people from doing things unless you chain them to the kitchen table. parents cannot (and should not) be everywhere, and kids will be unsupervised more often then they are supervised. if they want to do something, they will do it. parents can only help their teenage children develop good decision-making skills. they cannot and should not make decisions for them.

No, but having someone feed you, clothe you, put a roof over your head, and accept responsibility for you is a privilege that should not be abused.

no. absolutely not. i cannot disagree more.

all of these things are absolute rights, not priveleges. parents are required to feed, clothe, and house their children to the best of their ability, regardless of the child's behavior.

when you decide to have a child, you are accepting responsibility to provide for that child. there is no "good behavior" clause on that responsibility.

if you don't want that responsibility, don't have kids. have an abortion or give the kid up for adoption. if you have a child, implicit in accepting that responsibility is the understanding that you will be taking care of someone who cannot take care of themselves, and who will be free to develop into a person with their own rights and opinions.

Sex ALWAYS equals risk of pregnancy. And that's quite a risk.

driving ALWAYS involves the risk of dying in a horrible crash. teach your kids to buckle their seatbelts and check their blind spots when changing lanes and they'll probably be OK.

 

dizfactor
Good points. I don't disagree, I was just coming at things from a different angle.

"when you decide to have a child, you are accepting responsibility to provide for that child. there is no "good behavior" clause on that responsibility.

Completely agreed. But when you say the child has "absoulte rights", that's according to whom? The parent has the responsibility to provide for the kid, but the kid must still respect the fact that he/she is being provided for.


"driving ALWAYS involves the risk of dying in a horrible crash. teach your kids to buckle their seatbelts and check their blind spots when changing lanes and they'll probably be OK. "

True, but the risk of pregnancy is just one aspect of teenage sex that has a chance of ending badly.

 

Making rules for kids does not teach them a thing. Only teaching them WHY the rules are as they are will do that.

Example: you tell your kid not to curse around old Aunt Ida. Is this limiting free speech? Yeah, but on the other hand, what's wrong with showing some consideration for the aunt, no matter how silly you think she's being to stroke out everytime someone says "Oh, my God!"? You don't live with her every day, it's not that big a deal. If the kid understands all this, no rule need be applied - he will understand WHY it's wrong and not do it (most of the time).

Second example: don't make a rule against using heroin. Teach your kid what that crap does to your brain cells over time. If that doesn't convince them it ain't worth it, no rule will either.

Third: don't simply make rules like "You can't have sex until you're 22 or married or whatever". Teach them what sex does to your mind, your emotions, your life. Of course, if you were happy to get some anytime and from anyone when you were their age, you'll have trouble convincing them there's a point in being discriminating. But that's why I criticize our whole sick culture - people are so obsessed with getting to sex, I don't think most of them know how to really appreciate it!

 

"driving ALWAYS involves the risk of dying in a horrible crash. teach your kids to buckle their seatbelts and check their blind spots when changing lanes and they'll probably be OK. "

True, but the risk of pregnancy is just one aspect of teenage sex that has a chance of ending badly.

Hmm, I'm not really sure what was meant by this, but there are plenty of things that could go wrong while driving. You could kill yourself, you could kill others, and you could give yourself brain damage, among other things. The worst that can happen from sex (depending on your point of view) is that you could either get AIDS or get pregnant, or both. If you're extremely responsible about sex, you can reduce that risk to nearly nothing. When driving, you can give your kid all the guidance in the world. They could still die from being hit by a drunk driver. Sex happens between two consenting people. Driving happens between your son or daughter and every other lunatic that happens to be out driving that day.

 

Great point Treecave. Kids are not going to follow rules that they don't understand. I also think kids need to some input when a parent makes rules. For my 9 year old, we sit down once a month with him, discuss the rules what we feel needs to be improved, what he feels needs to be improved, we discuss the punishments and rewards, whats working and whats not. I really feel this is going to work great when our kids become teenagers, because they will feel they have a part in the rules and responsiblities in our home. And they will understand why we have they rules. Communication is the key to good parenting. You can't stop your teenagers from having sex, but they might stop and think about it if you've had serious two-way conversations about sex.

On the topic of marriage and divorce, is there another thread to discuss it because its off topic?

 

This is just getting silly now.

"Making rules for kids does not teach them a thing. Only teaching them WHY the rules are as they are will do that."

Treecave, is that a general statement or are you debating statements made prior to that? I don't know who said rules should be made and not explained, but if someone did, I'm glad you took issue with it.

gwaernardel
"Hmm, I'm not really sure what was meant by this, but there are plenty of things that could go wrong while driving. You could kill yourself, you could kill others, and you could give yourself brain damage, among other things. "

Don't those things fall under "horrible crash"?

"The worst that can happen from sex (depending on your point of view) is that you could either get AIDS or get pregnant, or both"

Good statement. Are you arguing for me or against me???

"Driving happens between your son or daughter and every other lunatic that happens to be out driving that day. "

And certainly you'll never run across any of those lunatics during sexual intercourse.

Look, obviously your point of view doesn't consider the emotional resonance of a sexual relationship at a young age, but you are entitled to that point of view.

 

Don't those things fall under "horrible crash"?

The statement that was made was not just about being in a horrible crash. Here's the statement that you were referring to: "driving ALWAYS involves the risk of dying in a horrible crash"

Good statement. Are you arguing for me or against me???

I'm not arguing for you against you. I really am not all that concerned with what you think. I'm clarifying a point that was made.

And certainly you'll never run across any of those lunatics during sexual intercourse.

Lunatics or not, if you raise your kid right they'll know to keep away with the disease-ridden, no-condom-wearing crowd. My point is that kids (usually) have a choice of who to sleep with. They don't have a choice about who else is going to be driving.

Look, obviously your point of view doesn't consider the emotional resonance of a sexual relationship at a young age, but you are entitled to that point of view.

If you really think that the emotional impact of having sex before you're ready is worse than getting a disease that will kill you, you're entitled to your point of view, too.

 

Okay, we'll have to agree to disagree that teenage sex is like driving a car.

"My point is that kids (usually) have a choice of who to sleep with."

I don't think most kids, who haven't fully matured and have limited social experience, particularly with other mature people, are very well-equipped at making such important and sometimes subtle character judgements. Do you? The "disease-ridden, no-condom-wearing crowd" don't always wear signs.

"If you really think that the emotional impact of having sex before you're ready is worse than getting a disease that will kill you, you're entitled to your point of view, too."

I said they're all factors, I didn't say which ones were worse.

 

I don't think most kids, who haven't fully matured and have limited social experience, particularly with other mature people, are very well-equipped at making such important and sometimes subtle character judgements. Do you? The "disease-ridden, no-condom-wearing crowd" don't always wear signs.

We're really not talking about kids here. We're talking about teenagers. This thread is about sexual education. If parents talk to their kids about sex, they get proper sexual education, and the kid is at least somewhat smart, their chance of sleeping with someone that will hurt them (emotionally, mentally, or physically) is much much less.

And I don't know what you were trying to argue with the driving thing, but I think it takes an incredibly mature person to be trusted with the keys of a car. I don't see why that maturity would be limited to the area of driving.

 

I dunno, I feel like there are different types of maturity... like, I guess I can only talk about myself, but I know I'm mature enough to drive, but NOT to have sex.

 

It was actually someone else who first made the comparison. Personally, I agree with Rebecca. I think it's ridiculous.

 

I don't think it's ridiculous at all. Look at how many 16-year-olds die every year from driving. I've posted the stats before in other threads. It's a huge responsibility and a huge risk. I don't see why sex is any less of a risk.

 

I don't think just because you are ready for driving you are ready for sex.

There are tons of people driving, everday. Most of them are not involved in accidents. When you have sex, there are always going to be emotions, no matter what. You could practice completely safe sex - and your emotions could still be devestated.

 

Yes, but you can't protect your emotions every second. If that were true you may as well quit watching the news or going outside your house.